# Oil Country Tubular Goods From Japan; Notice of Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Administrative Review

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A97-12388

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Notice
- **Published:** May 12, 1997
- **Citation:** 62 FR 25889

## Text

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-588-835]

Oil Country Tubular Goods From Japan; Notice of Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of partial rescission and preliminary results of
antidumping duty administrative review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country
tubular goods from Japan. This review was initiated in response to
requests by importers, Helmerich & Payne, Inc. (H&P) and Caprock Pipe
and Supply (Caprock), for a review of NKK Corporation of Japan (NKK)
and HEBRA AS (HEBRA), respectively. Although we initiated a review of
both NKK and HEBRA, we are rescinding the review with respect to HEBRA
because Caprock timely withdrew its request for review. This review
covers one producer/exporter and entries of drill pipe during the
period August 11, 1995 through July 31, 1996, and entries of oil
country tubular goods (OCTG) other than drill pipe during the period
February 2, 1995 through July 31, 1996.
Because NKK did not submit a complete response to our
questionnaire, we have preliminarily determined that facts available
will be used. Interested parties who submit comments are requested to
submit with each comment a statement of the issue and a brief summary
of the comment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 12, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Bezirganian or John Kugelman,
AD/CVD Enforcement Group III--Office 8, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone
(202) 482-1395 or 482-0649, respectively.

Applicable Statute

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute refer to
the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the
amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act), by the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all
citations to the Department's regulations are to the current
regulations, as amended by the intermim regulations published in the
Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Scope of the Review

The merchandise covered by this order is oil country tubular goods
(OCTG), hollow steel products of circular cross-section, including only
oil well casing, tubing and drill pipe, of iron (other than cast iron)
or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether seamless or welded, whether
or not conforming to American Petroleum Institute (API) or non-API
specifications, whether finished or unfinished (including green tubes
and limited service OCTG products). This scope does not cover casing,
tubing, or drill pipe containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium. The
OCTG subject to this order are currently classified in the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers:
7304.29.10.10, 7304.29.10.20, 7304.29.10.30, 7304.29.10.40,
7304.29.10.50, 7304.29.10.60, 7304.29.10.80, 7304.29.20.10,
7304.29.20.20, 7304.29.20.30, 7304.29.20.40, 7304.29.20.50,
7304.29.20.60, 7304.29.20.80, 7304.29.30.10, 7304.29.30.20,
7304.29.30.30, 7304.29.30.40, 7304.29.30.50, 7304.29.30.60,
7304.29.30.80, 7304.29.40.10, 7304.29.40.20, 7304.29.40.30,
7304.29.40.40, 7304.29.40.50, 7304.29.40.60, 7304.29.40.80,
7304.29.50.15, 7304.29.50.30, 7304.29.50.45, 7304.29.50.60,
7304.29.50.75, 7304.29.60.15, 7304.29.60.30, 7304.29.60.45,
7304.29.60.60, 7304.29.60.75, 7304.21.30.00, 7304.21.60.30,
7304.21.60.45, 7304.21.60.60, 7305.20.20.00, 7305.20.40.00,
7305.20.60.00, 7305.20.80.00, 7306.20.10.30, 7306.20.10.90,
7306.20.20.00, 7306.20.30.00, 7306.20.40.00, 7306.20.60.10,
7306.20.60.50, 7306.20.80.10, and 7306.20.80.50.
Please note that many of these HTS numbers have changed since the
less-than-fair value (LTFV) investigation. Although the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the
scope of this proceeding is dispositive.

Background

In its final determination of sales at LTFV on OCTG from Japan, 60
FR 33560 (June 28, 1995), the Department determined that the two
respondents, Nippon Steel Corp. and Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd.,
refused to cooperate by failing to respond to the Department's
questionnaire. Therefore, in accordance with Sec. 776(b) of the Act and
its standard practice, the Department assigned the highest margin in
the petition, 44.20 percent, to both respondents, and assigned the same
rate to all others.
On August 2, 1995, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act,
the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) notified the Department
of its final determination in this investigation. In its determination
the ITC found two like products, (1) drill pipe, and (2) OCTG other
than drill pipe (i.e., casing and tubing). The ITC determined that
imports of drill pipe from Japan threatened material injury to a U.S.
industry. However, the ITC did not determine that, but for the
suspension of liquidation of entries of drill pipe from Japan, the
domestic industry would have been materially injured, pursuant to
section 735(b)(4)(B) of the Act.
When the ITC finds threat of material injury, and makes a negative
``but for'' finding, the ``Special Rule'' provision of section
736(b)(2) of the Act applies. Therefore, all unliquidated entries of
drill pipe from Japan, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption, on or after the date on which the ITC published its notice
of final determination of threat of material injury in the Federal
Register, are liable for the assessment of antidumping duties.
On August 11, 1995, we published an antidumping duty order on the
subject merchandise (60 FR 41058). Pursuant to section 736(b)(2) of the
Act, the Department directed the U.S. Customs Service to terminate the
suspension of liquidation for entries of drill pipe imported from Japan
and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for

[[Page 25890]]

consumption, before August 10, 1995, the date on which the ITC
published its notice of final determination of threat of material
injury in the Federal Register, and to release any bond or other
security, and to refund any cash deposit, posted to secure the payment
of estimated antidumping duties with respect to entries of the
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption,
before that date. The Department also directed the U.S. Customs Service
to suspend liquidation for drill pipe from Japan with respect to
shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after August 10, 1995. Regarding OCTG other than drill pipe, because
the ITC determined that imports of such merchandise were materially
injuring a U.S. industry, in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act,
the Department directed the U.S. Customs Service to continue to suspend
liquidation of such shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after February 2, 1995, the date on which the
Department published its LTFV preliminary determination notice in the
Federal Register (60 FR 6506). The Department also directed the U.S.
Customs Service to require for all entries of OCTG from Japan falling
under the scope of the order, effective August 11, 1995, a cash deposit
equal to the margin rate determined in the investigation.
On August 12, 1996, we published a notice of opportunity to request
an administrative review (61 FR 41768), covering the period February 2,
1995 through July 31, 1996 for OCTG other than drill pipe, and the
period August 11, 1995 through July 31, 1996 for drill pipe. On August
28, 1996, H&P, an importer of drill pipe, requested an administrative
review of sales of subject merchandise produced by NKK and imported, or
withdrawn from a foreign trade zone, by H&P during the review period
for drill pipe (August 11, 1995, through July 31, 1996). On August 29,
1996, Caprock, an importer of used OCTG, requested an administrative
review of OCTG produced by all Japanese manufacturers. On September 4,
1996, Caprock clarified that the company to be reviewed was actually
HEBRA (which Caprock identified as a Norwegian export company), rather
than all Japanese manufacturers.
The Department published a notice of initiation of an
administrative review covering HEBRA and NKK on September 17, 1996 (61
FR 48882).
On September 19, 1996, we sent a questionnaire to NKK and HEBRA. On
November 14, 1996, HEBRA submitted a letter stating that it would not
submit a response to the Department's questionnaire, and Caprock
submitted a letter withdrawing its request for a review.

Use of Facts Otherwise Available

NKK indicated that it did not sell or ship subject merchandise to
the United States during the period of review (POR). Information on the
record of this review, however, indicates that there were entries
during the POR of subject merchandise produced by NKK. Pursuant to
Sec. 751(a)(2) of the Act, these entries are subject to review,
regardless of NKK's assertions regarding sale and shipment dates. NKK
twice failed to answer the questions in the Department's questionnaire,
so the Department must base the margin upon facts available.
Where the Department must base the entire dumping margin for a
respondent in an administrative review on facts otherwise available
because that respondent failed to cooperate, section 776(b) of the Act
authorizes the use of an inference adverse to the interests of that
respondent in choosing the facts available. Section 776(b) of the Act
also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available
information derived from the petition, the final determination, a
previous administrative review, or other information placed on the
record. Section 776(c) of the Act provides that the Department shall,
to the extent practicable, corroborate secondary information from
independent sources reasonably at its disposal. The Statement of
Administrative Action (SAA) provides that ``corroborate'' means simply
that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information
to be used has probative value. (See H.R. Doc. 316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong.,
2d sess. 870 (1994).)
Consistent with Section 776(b) of the Act, we have assigned to NKK
a rate equal to the highest rate for any company for the same class or
kind of merchandise from the same country from this or any prior
segment of the proceeding, or from the petition. In this instance, we
have used the highest rate in the petition, the rate adopted by the
Department in the investigation underlying this order.
In accordance with section 776(c) of the Act, to corroborate
secondary information the Department will, to the extent practicable,
examine the reliability and relevance of the information to be used--in
this case, the highest rate from the petition. That rate was based upon
the difference between U.S. price of a representative OCTG product sold
by one Japanese company and constructed value for that product. Our
review of the information in the original petition pertaining to the
price of the product and to the major inputs (e.g., iron ore, coke,
scrap) and processes (ironmaking, steelmaking, and bloom and pipe
production) used for the production of the final merchandise did not
indicate that the analysis of the OCTG market in the petition is no
longer appropriate to use as a basis for facts available. Furthermore,
nothing on the record of this review supports a determination that the
highest margin rate from the petition in the underlying investigation
does not represent reliable and relevant information for purposes of
adverse facts available. Therefore, in this proceeding, the highest
margin from the petition is the most appropriate information on which
to base a margin for this uncooperative respondent.

Preliminary Results of the Review

As a result of the review, we preliminarily determine that the
following weighted-average dumping margin exists:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Manufacturer/producer/exporter margin
percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NKK........................................................ 44.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parties to this proceeding may request disclosure within five days
of publication of this notice and any interested party may request a
hearing within 10 days of publication. Any hearing, if requested, will
be held 44 days after the date of publication, or the first working day
thereafter. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written
comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication. Rebuttal
briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited to issues raised in
such briefs or comments, may be filed no later than 37 days after the
date of publication of this notice. The Department will publish a
notice of the final results of the administrative review, including its
analysis of issues raised in any written comments or at a hearing, not
later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice.

Cash Deposit

The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
completion of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of OCTG from Japan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption, on or after the publication date of the final results of
this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act
and 19 CFR 353.22: (1) the cash deposit

[[Page 25891]]

rate for NKK will be the rate established in the final results of this
administrative review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated
companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if
the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or
the original LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period
for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate
for all other manufacturers or exporters will be 44.20 percent, the
``all others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation. These
deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.

Dated: May 5, 1997.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-12388 Filed 5-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A97-12388. Public record. Not legal advice.